Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 1,681 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 341,308
Pageviews Today: 442,640Threads Today: 89Posts Today: 1,426
03:05 AM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

US Sides with Japan on Disputed Islands: Beijing says its a betrayal, orders troops combat ready, could cash in on US debt for equity

 
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 7739188
United States
01/21/2013 03:51 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Sides with Japan on Disputed Islands: Beijing says its a betrayal, orders troops combat ready, could cash in on US debt for equity
Manna = what is it ?

A1-Z26 Joel Three – Nine =140

Joel 3:9 Proclaim ye this among the gentiles; prepare war =121 wake up the mighty men, let all the men of war draw near; let them come up: = 1122 `

Xi Jinping = 112

PLA - People's Liberation Army > Zhōngguó Rénmín Jiěfàngjūn = 212
` `
Rev 6:3 and when He had opened the second seal, I heard the second beast = 140 say, come and see. = 598

President China > Hu Jintao = 98

112+98 = 210

The directives have been issued just months after Xi Jinping took over as the PLA commander-in-chief from Hu Jintao.

Continued @ [link to www.christianforums.net]
Anderson_G

User ID: 32706657
United Kingdom
01/21/2013 03:58 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Sides with Japan on Disputed Islands: Beijing says its a betrayal, orders troops combat ready, could cash in on US debt for equity
This is also correlated to the happenings in Africa.

China is moving in position to take lead as THE superpower & make a grab for resources.

Unlike Westerners, the Chinese are long term planners & thinkers, this has been in the works for many decades. Make no mistake, it is well planned and they will play like a chess master as our clueless executive branch parties away. Only when Americans are boxed into check mate will they ascertain the dire position we find ourselves in.


Morning, Doorbert!!!


Hiding 2
 Quoting: Lady Jane Smith


I agree.
 Quoting: Dangerwalt


mali....well...here is another thought:

germany intends to bring home its gold.
what if that gold is gone?
mabe france and brit are invading mali to pay back germanys gold by robbing it from mali?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 32620901



Its bigger then that but your on the right page there buddy

Thread: Forget Iran Look At Africa Iran Is A Diversion
Anderson_G

<<<<<<<<<<<<LEARN ADAPT OVERCOME>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Always expect the unexpected and beware of nasty things pretending to be nice.
Knowledge is Power, Power is A target, You are Dangerous with Knowledge therefore you are a Target.
I Don't Hate A Race, I hate An Ideal, Race Is A Label Given To The Masses To Hate.

Behind Every Good Man There Is A Good Woman. <<( Lowkey )

ma adjmala al-Hurriya

Don't Advertise A Bigger Prick Than You Got
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 29045574
United States
01/21/2013 04:00 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Sides with Japan on Disputed Islands: Beijing says its a betrayal, orders troops combat ready, could cash in on US debt for equity
Chinese historians are already claiming Okinawa Japan. They are also claiming the Artic. Look what happened to TIBET all the civilians are getting persecuted daily, the very own culture destroyed by China.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 31987691
Australia
01/21/2013 04:01 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Sides with Japan on Disputed Islands: Beijing says its a betrayal, orders troops combat ready, could cash in on US debt for equity
If the Chinese really mean business they'll just take the islands.

Would Japan really take on the entire Chinese army, navy and air force over an uninhabited rock?

Something tells me no.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 32715180
01/21/2013 04:14 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Sides with Japan on Disputed Islands: Beijing says its a betrayal, orders troops combat ready, could cash in on US debt for equity
If the Chinese really mean business they'll just take the islands.

Would Japan really take on the entire Chinese army, navy and air force over an uninhabited rock?

Something tells me no.
 Quoting: The Tauremini


They can't just take islands that belong to Japan. That would create a backlash.
Fatstogie

User ID: 25210191
United States
01/21/2013 04:42 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Sides with Japan on Disputed Islands: Beijing says its a betrayal, orders troops combat ready, could cash in on US debt for equity
Haha was sorta funny i read this thread and thought of doorbert before i read that it was him. lulz
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 32723561
United States
01/21/2013 04:42 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Sides with Japan on Disputed Islands: Beijing says its a betrayal, orders troops combat ready, could cash in on US debt for equity
BEIJING: Amid rising tensions with Japan over disputed islands, Chinese army in a bid to scale up battle readiness has ordered its armed helicopters to shift focus from logistic missions and gear up for combat operations.

The People's Liberation Army (PLA) planned to change the training strategy of its army aviation unit as more and more armed helicopters joined the service, PLA Daily which is the official newspaper of the military quoted an army aviation unit as saying.

The focus of army aviation unit will be shifted from logistics missions to combat ones, from building the capacity for non-war military actions to core military actions, state-run Xinhua news agency quoted the daily as saying.

[link to timesofindia.indiatimes.com]
 Quoting: DoorBert


US Dangerous Stance

Opinion article in CHINADAILY

[link to usa.chinadaily.com.cn]
Tigershield

User ID: 25765737
Netherlands
01/21/2013 04:46 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Sides with Japan on Disputed Islands: Beijing says its a betrayal, orders troops combat ready, could cash in on US debt for equity
So many people think it's about the bloody islands. They dont give a shit about those rocks.

It's the massive resources under that island. Gas/oil ect
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 29045574
United States
01/21/2013 04:52 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Sides with Japan on Disputed Islands: Beijing says its a betrayal, orders troops combat ready, could cash in on US debt for equity
If the Chinese really mean business they'll just take the islands.

Would Japan really take on the entire Chinese army, navy and air force over an uninhabited rock?

Something tells me no.
 Quoting: The Tauremini


They can't just take islands that belong to Japan. That would create a backlash.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 32715180


There won't be backlash it will be a slugfest gangnam style.

China is preparing for war against the West since Day 1. It will be unexpected when it happens.

It will be simultaneous from computers to satellites. It will reach the 2nd Island chain all the way to Australlia and the Pacific. All it take is just one chinese sub with loaded SLBM's.
Dr. Charles Norris

User ID: 32738172
United States
01/21/2013 04:56 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Sides with Japan on Disputed Islands: Beijing says its a betrayal, orders troops combat ready, could cash in on US debt for equity
If the Chinese really mean business they'll just take the islands.

Would Japan really take on the entire Chinese army, navy and air force over an uninhabited rock?

Something tells me no.
 Quoting: The Tauremini


if they did...then there is obviously more than just islands there....

[link to i47.tinypic.com]
Anderson_G

User ID: 32706657
United Kingdom
01/21/2013 05:12 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Sides with Japan on Disputed Islands: Beijing says its a betrayal, orders troops combat ready, could cash in on US debt for equity
If the Chinese really mean business they'll just take the islands.

Would Japan really take on the entire Chinese army, navy and air force over an uninhabited rock?

Something tells me no.
 Quoting: The Tauremini


They can't just take islands that belong to Japan. That would create a backlash.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 32715180


yh but realistically who will want to go up against china the situation is being played as to getting BMD in place effectively so MAD isnt such an issue add up casualties to see if a few million deaths can be spared in the event of a war
Anderson_G

<<<<<<<<<<<<LEARN ADAPT OVERCOME>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Always expect the unexpected and beware of nasty things pretending to be nice.
Knowledge is Power, Power is A target, You are Dangerous with Knowledge therefore you are a Target.
I Don't Hate A Race, I hate An Ideal, Race Is A Label Given To The Masses To Hate.

Behind Every Good Man There Is A Good Woman. <<( Lowkey )

ma adjmala al-Hurriya

Don't Advertise A Bigger Prick Than You Got
Anderson_G

User ID: 32706657
United Kingdom
01/21/2013 05:12 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Sides with Japan on Disputed Islands: Beijing says its a betrayal, orders troops combat ready, could cash in on US debt for equity
If the Chinese really mean business they'll just take the islands.

Would Japan really take on the entire Chinese army, navy and air force over an uninhabited rock?

Something tells me no.
 Quoting: The Tauremini


They can't just take islands that belong to Japan. That would create a backlash.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 32715180


yh but realistically who will want to go up against china the situation is being played as to getting BMD in place effectively so MAD isnt such an issue add up casualties to see if a few million deaths can be spared in the event of a war
Anderson_G

<<<<<<<<<<<<LEARN ADAPT OVERCOME>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Always expect the unexpected and beware of nasty things pretending to be nice.
Knowledge is Power, Power is A target, You are Dangerous with Knowledge therefore you are a Target.
I Don't Hate A Race, I hate An Ideal, Race Is A Label Given To The Masses To Hate.

Behind Every Good Man There Is A Good Woman. <<( Lowkey )

ma adjmala al-Hurriya

Don't Advertise A Bigger Prick Than You Got
Desert FoxModerator
Forum Moderator

User ID: 8786935
United States
01/21/2013 05:58 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Sides with Japan on Disputed Islands: Beijing says its a betrayal, orders troops combat ready, could cash in on US debt for equity
I propose we pay our debt to China immediately by giving them Detroit, Chicongo and San Fransisco.
TOMABANEFOX
Dr. Charles Norris

User ID: 32738172
United States
01/21/2013 06:30 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Sides with Japan on Disputed Islands: Beijing says its a betrayal, orders troops combat ready, could cash in on US debt for equity
I propose we pay our debt to China immediately by giving them Detroit, Chicongo and San Fransisco.
 Quoting: Desert Fox


we have already started to pay off our debt to china by illegally selling them fresh water from the Great Lakes....
Chrit

User ID: 27088294
United States
01/21/2013 07:22 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Sides with Japan on Disputed Islands: Beijing says its a betrayal, orders troops combat ready, could cash in on US debt for equity
So many people think it's about the bloody islands. They dont give a shit about those rocks.

It's the massive resources under that island. Gas/oil ect
 Quoting: Tigershield


Yep, I'll use my old synopsis of the situation.


About the three tiny islands...

Basically after WWII Japan and the US signed the treaty of San Francisco in 1951 along with 48 other nations, but at the time china was in a civil war and we did not want to take sides so no representative from china was invited. So in 1952 the treaty of Taipei was signed by Japan and China, formalizing the treaty of San Francisco.

This gave up japans rights to Taiwan “Formosa” and the 64 Paracel islands. This was a big deal to China because when Chiang Kai-shek retreaded out of china with his army he made his capital on Taiwan. Taiwan is the “Republic of China”. Not to be confused with China itself “The people’s republic of China”.

China could have cared less about these three little islands at the time. They just wanted to legally crush the remainder of the exiled government of china who created Taiwan.

But in 1968 China discovered that there were huge oil deposits under these three tiny islands.

China claims they discovered the oil and owned the island sense the 14th century and japan annexed the islands in 1895 and lost control of them when they surrendered after WWII. America claimed legal rights to the islands and signed them over to japan in 1972 and at the same time japan dissolved the treaty of Taipei!

China was hoping to just get the islands handed over to them.

Now it gets sticky, China agrees the islands are part of Taiwan, and Taiwan agrees with that also. But Japan has no treaty with Taiwan and does not recognize it as a sovereign nation so legally the islands are part of Okinawa prefecture. Now the family that sold the islands to the Japanese government on September 11 2012 has legally owned them sense the beginning the 20th century when they first built a factory on the little islands.

But china considers it a violation of their territorial sovereignty now that they claim Taiwan as their own.

This all goes back to the Okinawa reversion treaty.

In the 1972 when the U.S. Gave the islands back to Japan due to the 1971 “Okinawa reversion treaty” it was put in writing that the U.S. was to keep the rights to one of the three islands as a firing range. Now that firing range has not been used sense 1978 because it always pissed off China. So for diplomatic reasons we stopped using it. But the island is still part of the treaty so if the island is lost the treaty is broken. If that treaty is broken it will be a whole new mess on a much larger scale that would leave japan defenseless legally because the three islands in question are part of the Okinawa prefecture. It would also legally revert Okinawa prefecture back to U.S. hands instantly.



Here is the line in the treaty.

2. All other properties of the Government of the United States of America, existing in the Ryukyu Islands and the Daito Islands as of the date of entry into force of this Agreement and located outside the facilities and areas provided on that date in accordance with Article III of this Agreement, shall be transferred to the Government of Japan on that date, except for those that are located on the lands returned to the landowners concerned before the date of entry into force of this Agreement and for those the title to which will be retained by the Government of the United States of America after that date with the consent of the Government of Japan.

[link to www.niraikanai.wwma.net]

Now you understand why we gave the islands back to the origional owners and not to the goverment it self. This is also why the treaty was signed in june of 1971 but did not take effect for over a year till after we gave the three islands back in 1972. They had to get everything set just the way we wanted it.

Last Edited by Chrit on 01/21/2013 08:43 PM
I'm only human, it's my biggest flaw.

We must all realize a sink a chair and a pillow are all luxuries of home and a soldiers helmet takes the place of all three.
Cocorito90

User ID: 28952191
San Marino
01/21/2013 07:24 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Sides with Japan on Disputed Islands: Beijing says its a betrayal, orders troops combat ready, could cash in on US debt for equity
can't China wound financially US? or this would eventually wound China itself?
Chrit

User ID: 27088294
United States
01/21/2013 07:32 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Sides with Japan on Disputed Islands: Beijing says its a betrayal, orders troops combat ready, could cash in on US debt for equity
...


Source?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 32715180



PieBondDebt
 Quoting: Chrit


The US government own "federal" debt?!
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 32715180


I ALREADY GAVE YOU A SOURCE!

"The largest portion of U.S. debt, 68 cents for every dollar or about $10 trillion, is owned by individual investors, corporations, state and local governments and, yes, even foreign governments such as China that hold Treasury bills, notes and bonds.

Foreign governments hold about 46 percent of all U.S. debt held by the public, more than $4.5 trillion. The largest foreign holder of U.S. debt is China, which owns more about $1.2 trillion in bills, notes and bonds, according to the Treasury.

In total, China owns about 8 percent of publicly held U.S. debt. Of all the holders of U.S. debt China is the third-largest, behind only the Social Security Trust Fund's holdings of nearly $3 trillion and the Federal Reserve's nearly $2 trillion holdings in Treasury investments, purchased as part of its quantitative easing program to boost the economy."


[link to usgovinfo.about.com]
 Quoting: Dr. Charles Norris


another do
 Quoting: Dr. Charles Norris




The fed itself is its own primary bond holder.

The fed owns 43% of its own bonds, they inject this money that they have borrowed from themselves back in to the market. If the market takes a down turn and the fed fails to make a profit by the time these bonds mature, the value of the dollar will collapse in on itself.

That 77 billion the fed made last year barely got them by.

To put it very simply, it’s like using one credit card to pay off another credit card. That’s fine till you miss one payment then the whole thing collapses quickly.

In 2007 the fed held just 4% of its own bonds.

In 2010 the fed only owned 24% of its own bonds; this is how quickly it has gotten out of control.

Foreign banks are just waiting for our market to collapse so they can buy in cheap!


We are caught in what is known as a “third world debt trap” now that foreign governments will not buy our bonds, we have to leverage our selves, and the second the market doesn’t have a return its over!





Fed has bought $1.6 trillion in bonds with QE &QE2 due to the fact no one else would buy the debt. The Debt brought on By QE & QE2 is part of the debt ceiling it, does exist. The bonds held by the Fed are literally money that the government owes to itself.


In 2007 the fed owned less then 4% of the bonds, today they hold 43% of all issued bonds.


Everything changed in 2008, hard to find any link at all that I like on the subject, this one is ok.



Article:The Fed can issue non-interest bearing debt now. This is the Federal Reserve notes that we use as a medium of exchange. When the Fed buys things like Treasury bills, commercial paper, junk bonds, stocks, or many other securities, it pays by creating reserves for banks that can be cashed out, if desired, as Federal Reserve notes. The Fed has created a ton of potentially inflationary reserves lately. It is paying interest on these reserves in order to "sterilize" them, that is, prevent them from being cashed out and from being used to make an excessive amount of new loans. It's trying to save the banking system without causing inflation. It appears that the proposal to issue interest-bearing debt is a variation on this scheme.

The basic scheme that is now in place is that the Fed wishes to support security markets that are under pressure. It buys mortgage obligations, for example. The sellers deposit their checks. The Fed clears them by crediting the reserve account of the member banks making the deposits. Ordinarily, as the bank lends, the multiplicative effect of fractional-reserve banking kicks in. The money supply rises. At present, the Fed is trying to short-circuit that process by paying interest on the reserves. Their success at this manipulation will end when the banks start making loans that pay interest higher than what the Fed is offering. At that point the Fed will have to sell loans so as to drain reserves from the system, if it wishes to stem inflation. The Fed will be reluctant to do this. It has fewer Treasury bills than it used to. Its loans are too illiquid to sell. The Fed must overcome this problem or risk much higher inflation.

Enter the new scheme. The Fed issues interest-bearing debt. Whoever buys this, whether an investor or a bank, they pay with a check. When it clears, some bank's reserves decline. This absorbs reserves and/or cash from the system. The banks, for example, use their reserves to buy the Fed's debt. It carries a higher interest rate than what the Fed pays on the short-term reserve accounts. This deters the banking system from using all those reserves in an inflationary manner. In short, the Fed is re-financing the liability side of its balance sheet. It is converting short-term debt (bank reserves) into long-term debt (its own bonds.) By funding its troubled assets with long-term debt, the Fed signals that it intends to hold these assets for a long time. It is now thinking about funding these long-term assets with long-term debt. The banking system is being induced to convert short-term liquid reserves into long-term Federal Reserve bonds.

The big picture here is something like this. The banking system has a lot of lousy loans on its books. It didn't mark them all down or fully because that would reveal that many banks are insolvent. They would need to be re-organized. The insolvent banks didn't want this done. The Fed rode to the rescue by exchanging its good securities for bad loans from the banks — some of them, not all. Meanwhile, bad loans began to crop up elsewhere in the system. The Fed took on some of those too. In the process, it has created far too high a level of bank reserves, a level that is highly inflationary if put to work making new loans. By issuing long-term debt, the Fed would complete the process it began. The banks would now have as assets the better securities the Fed loaned them plus they would have Federal Reserve bonds.

As for the Fed, its balance sheet would now carry as assets many troubled loans that the banks once held. On the liability side, the Fed would have issued its own bonds. Its financial leverage would have increased dramatically even as its asset quality decreased dramatically. Some of the shakiness of the banking system would be transported into shakiness of the Fed as a bank. This would not resolve all the problems because the total amount of shaky debt in the system, in the U.S. and worldwide, is so great that the Fed can absorb only a small fraction of it.

An interesting thing to wonder about is the risk of the Fed's bonds. The riskiness of liabilities derives from the riskiness of assets. Since the Fed has taken on numerous questionable loans (and refuses to be transparent about those loans), its assets have risen in risk as compared to when it held mainly Treasury bills. If the cash flows of the Fed's bonds are to be serviced by the cash flows of these assets, then those bonds will not be risk-free. But the Fed has the power to buy any security it wants to. It can buy its own bonds in the market and support the price (although this raises bank reserves and defeats the purpose of the bonds). It can make them risk-free, although this is unlikely.

50% rule

[link to www.lewrockwell.com]


This below is the new scheme they are doing now...

reverse-repos

[link to tv.ibtimes.com]
 Quoting: Chrit

I'm only human, it's my biggest flaw.

We must all realize a sink a chair and a pillow are all luxuries of home and a soldiers helmet takes the place of all three.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1565088
United States
01/21/2013 07:51 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Sides with Japan on Disputed Islands: Beijing says its a betrayal, orders troops combat ready, could cash in on US debt for equity
Let them cash in on US debt for equity.Good luck collecting.
whatever
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 32771247
United States
01/21/2013 09:51 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Sides with Japan on Disputed Islands: Beijing says its a betrayal, orders troops combat ready, could cash in on US debt for equity
The only legitimate thing to do is to declare neutrality and stay out of the way. We have no right or business getting involved in their dispute.

The American people deserve peace, not yet another stupid war.

Besides all of that, we'd lose to China.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 11934995
Canada
01/21/2013 10:02 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Sides with Japan on Disputed Islands: Beijing says its a betrayal, orders troops combat ready, could cash in on US debt for equity
The only legitimate thing to do is to declare neutrality and stay out of the way. We have no right or business getting involved in their dispute.

The American people deserve peace, not yet another stupid war.

Besides all of that, we'd lose to China.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 32771247


If you declare neutrality in a dispute involving a major ally to whom you're bound by treaty obligations, you might as well wrap up NATO now.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 32771247
United States
01/21/2013 10:22 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Sides with Japan on Disputed Islands: Beijing says its a betrayal, orders troops combat ready, could cash in on US debt for equity
The only legitimate thing to do is to declare neutrality and stay out of the way. We have no right or business getting involved in their dispute.

The American people deserve peace, not yet another stupid war.

Besides all of that, we'd lose to China.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 32771247


If you declare neutrality in a dispute involving a major ally to whom you're bound by treaty obligations, you might as well wrap up NATO now.
 Quoting: Swinburnian


China and Japan are equal in being allies. If anything, Japan has a lot of explaining to do regarding Fukushima and the pathetic response to it.

We need to let go of entangling alliances and let a row between friends stay that way.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 11934995
Canada
01/21/2013 10:44 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Sides with Japan on Disputed Islands: Beijing says its a betrayal, orders troops combat ready, could cash in on US debt for equity
The only legitimate thing to do is to declare neutrality and stay out of the way. We have no right or business getting involved in their dispute.

The American people deserve peace, not yet another stupid war.

Besides all of that, we'd lose to China.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 32771247


If you declare neutrality in a dispute involving a major ally to whom you're bound by treaty obligations, you might as well wrap up NATO now.
 Quoting: Swinburnian


China and Japan are equal in being allies. If anything, Japan has a lot of explaining to do regarding Fukushima and the pathetic response to it.

We need to let go of entangling alliances and let a row between friends stay that way.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 32771247

Not sure you get what ally means in this context
Anderson_G

User ID: 32794791
United Kingdom
01/22/2013 05:57 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Sides with Japan on Disputed Islands: Beijing says its a betrayal, orders troops combat ready, could cash in on US debt for equity
The only legitimate thing to do is to declare neutrality and stay out of the way. We have no right or business getting involved in their dispute.

The American people deserve peace, not yet another stupid war.

Besides all of that, we'd lose to China.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 32771247


If you declare neutrality in a dispute involving a major ally to whom you're bound by treaty obligations, you might as well wrap up NATO now.
 Quoting: Swinburnian


China and Japan are equal in being allies. If anything, Japan has a lot of explaining to do regarding Fukushima and the pathetic response to it.

We need to let go of entangling alliances and let a row between friends stay that way.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 32771247

Not sure you get what ally means in this context
 Quoting: Swinburnian


exactly swin It would be the as US bases in Europe coming under attack and the UK doing nothing Nato becomes null
Anderson_G

<<<<<<<<<<<<LEARN ADAPT OVERCOME>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Always expect the unexpected and beware of nasty things pretending to be nice.
Knowledge is Power, Power is A target, You are Dangerous with Knowledge therefore you are a Target.
I Don't Hate A Race, I hate An Ideal, Race Is A Label Given To The Masses To Hate.

Behind Every Good Man There Is A Good Woman. <<( Lowkey )

ma adjmala al-Hurriya

Don't Advertise A Bigger Prick Than You Got

News